This 1960 Studebaker Silver Hawk isn’t the first car spotted in this stunning location by Passin’Gas, but it’s a fitting backdrop for a coupe with such a dramatic presence. Judging by the height of the parking meter, these were low cars (and forgive my lack of familiarity; these aren’t exactly swarming around), helping exaggerate every one of their approximately two hundred inches of length. Without this viewpoint, I might be inclined to think the Golden Hawk to be a bit taller, and less lengthy.

Ah, but what’s this? The Honda CRZ, another (deservedly) uncommon car, helping put the Stude’s dimensions into perspective; would you guess that it’s shorter by about forty inches? Starting with the hardpoints of a monospace-influenced supermini isn’t the best way to make a sleek commuter and while raising the tail may aid aerodynamics, even if it manages to flatter the resulting shape (it doesn’t), it’s best when viewed in isolation.

If that is not possible, it’s best photographed with the lower, more lithe car in the foreground. This is kind to both subjects, making the Studebaker appear somewhat more imposing and the Honda, less bloated. Again, it would appear the photographer went out of his or her way to crouch for this shot. Capturing a car like this merits that sort of effort, but it may not be as necessary without the juxtaposition with the car directly behind it.

Of course, when all other attempts at flattery fail, it’s best to try and block out the offending party. Studebaker, this is what we in 2014 America call a photobomb.

It is hard to imagine how striking these must have been in 1953. Great photo, despite the help in establishing scale, it is a shame the parking meter got in the way. Still it does show it is a geniune CC find and not posed.

Beautiful shot. It is hard to grasp how low these are from photos. Given that the GT hawk did not stand out for its height among the low cars of the early 60s. The basic body must have been incredibly dramatic when it appeared in 1953.

I spent a lot of years pooh poohing these late finned Hawks, but I have become a convert. CRZ? Meh.

Someone used to park a Golden Hawk by my place of work. This was 30 years ago, but even then it was a rare sight (probably the only one I’ve ever seen in person). It had a two-tone gold and white paint job, and it was gorgeous. I often stopped to admire it while as I walked through the parking lot.

As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words, and the CRZ, already disappointing, looks positively ghastly to my eyes when parked next to something so low (and remember when Honda did “low” so well??). It was impossible to ignore.

Wow, really? I did a lot of work for the South Bend Silver Hawks about 10 years ago. The company I worked for back then printed their (some) brochures, all of the pocket schedules and the schedule holders. I think I may have one somewhere in all my detritus from that job.

I wished they would have played up the connection between the car and the team, but maybe it wouldn’t go over well in South Bend. Lansing’s, (MI) minor league baseball team is the Lugnuts, a little more overt homage to the former hometown company, Oldsmobile. They even play at Oldsmobile Park.

From a distance of around 100 miles away, it seems to me that South Bend holds a long term grudge against Studebaker. Jim Grey would know better than me, but it looks like what little celebration of Studebaker there is is more in spite of the city than because of it.

A person I know-he used to work in a different section where I once worked-owns a ’62
Studebaker Hawk. I saw the car one day and was amazed how low it was, it was a
a really beautiful automobile totally unlike anything on the road today. It was really ahead of its time, too bad Studebaker couldn’t do more with it.

When I was a kid, a family on my school bus route had 3 or 4 of these Hawks…I never saw any of them move under their own power.
As far as the height / length comparison with a 56 Chevy, a 57 Chevy looks even boxier and taller than a 56, Studebaker’s rep back then must have been pretty dismal. For a buying public that often bought on emotions, Studebaker should have sold better on looks alone.

I’ve mentioned before the bizarre decision making at Studebaker where the Hawk lost its hardtop and became two door sedan only for ’59-’61. In black, this car makes the most of the unfortunate choice.

I’ll double down on my criticism about the framed windows. The very thick frames fairly scream 1953. The ’57 Ford and ’57 Chryslers ushered in an era of thinner window frames that persists in different ways to this day. Studebaker’s attempts to keep the Hawk current by tacking on fins, etc., were foiled by their decision to discontinue the hardtop. There would be a lot of love for the featured car today if it were a hardtop and they had skipped the fins.

Simply put, this should have become hardtop only, and it took Studebaker until 1962 to figure that out.

I think a lot of modern cars look really bloated, which I suppose is partly a function of European pedestrian safety rules — which seem to demand a blunter, rounded nose — and partly a reflection of too many cars being designed around 18-inch or larger wheels, requiring enormous wheelhouses. It’s particularly noticeable on cars that aren’t that much longer or wider than their predecessors from the ’80s and ’90s; the Lexus LS, for example, looks like a sumo compared to the original LS400.

That’s interesting; I feel like the LS460 is one of the more tolerable production sedans, looking rather upright given the current standard. That could be related to different issues, like the use of big, blocky taillamps, but it seems that like current Mercedes sedans, Toyota gave the LS a cowl closely-set to the driver, which really helps (and perhaps its easier on long wheelbase, longitudinal layouts).

I’ll have to accept that pedestrian safety standards are to blame, since they’re commonly mentioned as a culprit. But what of increasingly stringent offset collision standards? Is increasing the distance from the cowl (adding survival space) and reducing the angle of the A-pillar and raising its base (thereby bulking it up) not another source of blame? After all, it’s a trend we’ve noticed before pedestrian safety standards.

The high school I went to in southern Indiana, a long way from South Bend actually had two students driving GT Hawks my sophomore year. One was a brand new ’64 the other a ’62. Another student had a slightly customized ’53 coupe that was a real beauty . He later put in a Nail Head Buick engine . When he joined the Navy he took the Stude with him, but later when he came home on leave he was driving a 1960 Buick convertible. What a contrast!!
Studes were not all that loved in our area, but the local TV repair shop owner also had a ’63 Hawk.

Even though it’s Silver rather than Golden (was the only difference pillared vs. true hardtop?) still a beautiful Studebaker. And an interesting one in that it’s purposefully low and long, as opposed the about-face they did with the shorty Lark a couple of years later. Definitely even more striking against the chunky CRZ, which I dislike for a number of reasons.

Fantastic house in the background too! Love the massive shingled gables and the oval windows to either side of the bays.

In 1957-58 the Golden Hawk was the hardtop and the Silver Hawk was the pillared version. The hardtop body went away after 58, so the 59 model was just the Silver Hawk. They dropped the “Silver” in 1960-61, and it was just the Studebaker Hawk for those two years.

The CR-Z is a very poorly conceived car all around, and this is a particularly beautiful example of the Silver Hawk in a great setting… but seeing the two side by side actually makes me think the CR-Z looks far more coherent. The fins on the Stude do not agree with that roof at all, especially with the pillars. I like them just for the fact that they exist, but when it comes to this series, it’s all about the original Starlight Coupe and the Gran Turismo Hawk. Everything in between was really awkward.

The CR-Z on the other hand, yeah it’s taller and bulkier… but you could substitute any car from the 2010s and come away with the same conclusion. IMO the styling is the least of its problems. I’m not sure how much it would’ve helped, but I wish Honda would have sold these in “HX” (hybrid), standard and Si form like the CRX.